Bernie 04.JPG (copy)

Columnist Zach Johnson believes Joe Biden is more likely to win the nomination than Bernie Sanders because of Biden's electability.

With coronavirus drastically changing the way most Americans live, the view of our candidates and their strengths have been plainly displayed.

Joe Biden appeared in last Sunday’s debate as someone who was putting on a successful act of portraying a president. A president, not in the sense of policy, but as an even-tempered person who could take the reins of the country and steer us in the right direction in these tumultuous times.

Bernie Sanders, in juxtaposition, appeared to be policy-oriented and contextualized the crisis in such a way as to highlight the need for socialized healthcare, using this crisis as proof that a stronger government would have mitigated the poor performance that is present via our current healthcare.

It is clear that both candidates think there needs to be more done to mitigate the individual hardship of having to social distance, but these separate ways of framing the crisis are emblematic of the way that these two candidates have presented their arguments for the nomination.

This is shown in exit polls conducted by The New York Times in the wake of elections in states like Washington, Texas, Michigan and across the board. When asked what is more important, voters who have voted for Biden are consistently looking for someone who is able to beat Trump as opposed to someone who agrees with them on policy. The exact opposite is true for Sanders.

This sort of nicely summarizes the characterization of both of the candidates’ appeal, and the conclusion that could be made anecdotally is that those who support Biden want a leader in these trying times while those supporting Sanders think his policies are the right thing for the country. You could characterize the opposition to Sanders from Biden supporters being that Sanders is not electable enough despite having progressive policy ideas. On the other side, the opposition to Biden from Sanders supporters is that he is not progressive enough policy-wise (this still holds, despite Biden’s attempts to appeal more to that progressive wing of the party.)

It is clear, however, based on the results of these primaries, that there is much more of an appetite for someone who can defeat Trump and be a leader in these trying times. This has been made even more clear and apparent by the spread of the novel coronavirus. Trump’s polling on his handling of the pandemic have roughly followed his approval numbers overall, and this can largely be characterized in the same way, meaning a high floor and a low ceiling. At this point, democrats have rallied around a candidate that will bring them back to the status quo that is so badly sought for after the tumultuous nature of the Trump presidency, and it is only a matter of time before this becomes a reality as Sanders is pressured to drop out.

Opinion Policies

Opinions expressed in columns and letters are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Daily or organizations with which the author(s) are associated. 

Feedback policy: The Daily encourages discussion but does not guarantee its publication. We reserve the right to edit or reject any letter or online feedback. The goal of the opinion section is to spark civil public discourse by publishing opinions based on facts that articulate an argument. The merit of a piece's ability to further public discourse, among other factors, will be considered when determining if a piece is publication worthy. 

Letter to the Editor Submission Link

(1) comment

Daniel Bell

Nobody is advocating for a government takeover of healthcare. Single Payer is health INSURANCE. Two different things. The basic idea of insurance is to spread the risk. A larger pool means a reduced impact on any one person. The current situation (not just a candidate) makes it painfully obvious that the health of the nation is a matter of national security, therefor it makes sense that it should be run by the federal government who is ultimately accountable to the people rather than wealthy shareholders. Or at least it was, before being slowly whittled away by Supreme Court rulings like Citizens United. So it's not just some petty squabble over who can beat Trump. He's beating himself just fine, to the detriment of the nation. It's about championing progressive policies that reflect the ability to learn from our mistakes and avoid new ones. The notion of maintaining the "status quo" is most commonly associated with conservatism, which is long outdated. We now have multiple factions under each banner, with some charging ahead toward corporate-centric policies while others take a more socially responsible approach. However, one concept that has stood the test of time and has no party affiliation: "Follow the money".

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.